Universal Health Care in the American Context (party affiliation, health care system, premium)

[OyCrumbler]

Dear Forum,

I have been wondering what would be the effects and repercussions of a universal health care system in the specific context of the US. There's been long and arduous debates about whether or not it would fit the US, but most of it talks about how successful it has been abroad with our developed country peers whether strongly socialist such as in much of the more developed countries of Europe or in very cut throat free market environments such as in East Asia (Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore, and Japan especially) rather than their specific ramifications for the US context.

I'm wondering how the entrepreneurial spirit of the US would fare if universal health care is existent. Certainly there are economies of scale to be had when medical supplies, medicine, and insurance are bought in such massive bulk along with stipulations of shared information and best practices as well as saved time and resources from not having to treat people when they are in the most dire and cost-inefficient conditions (in one specific instance of saved time and resources think of having fillings or examinations before root canals, extractions, and all around jaw infections), but what about how it might either enhance or detract from the entrepreneurial spirit overall?

Does universal health care allow for a far more fluid labor and skills market? Do you think it would allow people to explore options that are more in line with their skill sets or do you think it would cause more waste in allowing people to float their skill sets from one job to another? And if that were the case, do you think the skill sets and experiences learned from one occupation would become novel and beneficial viewpoints in other industries or simply be a constant clash of varying viewpoints?

[CowanStern]

Your question seems to be as follows: Is there something unique about America, that would make the country atypical in terms of the prospects for success under a public health plan.

I think the answer is no, the USA is far less "unique" than Americans tend to think it is. Every country in the developed world has made the jump to a public single payer, and as far as I know, none have regretted it, although most have needed to tweak it once it was in place. Actually, America is perhaps even more suited to it, compared to other countries, because as the largest, it has the most to gain through the economy of scale that you referenced.

No matter what the benefits are in retaining the American model, you will have to admit that those benefits (usually called "the best health care in the world") come at a staggeringly high price tag that the economy can't even come close to keeping up with. The current price is just under a million (current) dollars per person for a lifetime, and even that is deceptively low because the largest demographic has not yet reached the age at which their health care costs peak.

[mancat100]

It would be a boon to the economy. People would no longer be tethered to jobs they hate just to keep their insurance. Instead they'd have the peace of mind necessary to enable them to start businesses, further their education, or move into more suitable careers

Also, I'm so sick of hearing about Obama's "radical" healthcare plan. There's nothing radical about it. It started out as a Republican idea years ago. Also, every other Western nation has some sort of universal healthcare system. By definition, when every other country has done it, it is NOT radical. The correct word would be "normal".

[citylove101]

Originally Posted by mancat100

It would be a boon to the economy. People would no longer be tethered to jobs they hate just to keep their insurance. Instead they'd have the peace of mind necessary to enable them to start businesses, further their education, or move into more suitable careers

Also, I'm so sick of hearing about Obama's "radical" healthcare plan. There's nothing radical about it. It started out as a Republican idea years ago. Also, every other Western nation has some sort of universal healthcare system. By definition, when every other country has done it, it is NOT radical. The correct word would be "normal".

^^Bingo!

[Double-G]

The vast majority of Americans already have healthcare provided either through work or through existing state and federal programs. Yes, even people with pre-existing conditions.

Obamacare will tear a swathe through the entire current system and fail quickly due to lack of funding.

To those who believe in so called universal healthcare (single payer) - please move to Europe for 5 years, pay their taxes, get very sick, and let us know how you get on.

[mancat100]

Originally Posted by Double-G

The vast majority of Americans already have healthcare provided either through work or through existing state and federal programs. Yes, even people with pre-existing conditions.

Obamacare will tear a swathe through the entire current system and fail quickly due to lack of funding.

To those who believe in so called universal healthcare (single payer) - please move to Europe for 5 years, pay their taxes, get very sick, and let us know how you get on.

Sorry, but all the evidence shows that Europeans are overall quite happy with their universal healthcare. Sure, you can google up some anecdotal problems, but big picture is they like it. They'd never, ever want to switch to our ridiculous, barbaric health insurance system. Sure, the taxes are higher but you get more in return, plus keep in mind the higher taxes are largely replacing private insurance premiums.

Regarding Obamacare tearing a swath through our current system.... We can only hope that it does. The current system sucks. It may turn out that Obamacare will suck too, in which case maybe we can move beyond it to actual universal healthcare.

[creeksitter]

The vast majority of Americans already have healthcare provided either through work or through existing state and federal programs.

This is so not true

Yes, even people with pre-existing conditions.

This is total BS. Yes it is available right now through Obamacare but you are wanting to take that away.

I understand why big business wants to kill off the self employed and small entrepeneurs - the question is - Why do YOU?

[kyle19125]

Originally Posted by Double-G

The vast majority of Americans already have healthcare provided either through work or through existing state and federal programs. Yes, even people with pre-existing conditions.

One in three Americans is uninsured which while yes not the majority, means 100 million people aren't insured. Apparently you're part of the lucky two thirds (for now anyway) and could care less about everyone else... which also clearly identifies your political party affiliation.

[ram2]

Originally Posted by mancat100

It would be a boon to the economy. People would no longer be tethered to jobs they hate just to keep their insurance. Instead they'd have the peace of mind necessary to enable them to start businesses, further their education, or move into more suitable careers

Also, I'm so sick of hearing about Obama's "radical" healthcare plan. There's nothing radical about it. It started out as a Republican idea years ago. Also, every other Western nation has some sort of universal healthcare system. By definition, when every other country has done it, it is NOT radical. The correct word would be "normal".

But (middle-class) Americans will have to pay higher taxes to support national health care, so more people will have to job-hop to get bigger paychecks to keep up with increasing tax burden.

[creeksitter]

Somebody is paying a lot for healthcare already in the form of bloated insurance bills and inefficient practices. I pay more for insurance than I do for income tax, so I'd come out ahead.

It would be easier to job hop if you didn't have to worry about insurance - that is how the free market is supposed to operate. But in reality, your boss will be able to pay much more if they aren't paying huge insurance premiums.